DOCSLIB.ORG

Consolidated Opposition to Petitions to Deny and Comments, Filed By

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Consolidated Opposition to Petitions to Deny and Comments, Filed By Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Applications of ) MB Docket No. 19-30 Tribune Media Company ) and ) Nexstar Media Group, Inc. ) ) For Consent to the Transfer of Control and ) Assignment of Licenses ) CONSOLIDATED OPPOSITION TO PETITIONS TO DENY AND COMMENTS Mace Rosenstein Richard J. Bodorff Ann West Bobeck Eve Klindera Reed COVINGTON & BURLING LLP Gregory L. Masters One CityCenter, 850 Tenth Street, NW Ari S. Meltzer Washington, D.C. 20001 WILEY REIN LLP 202.662.5460 1776 K Street, NW Counsel to Tribune Media Company Washington, D.C. 20006 202.719.7000 Counsel to Nexstar Media Group, Inc. Dated: April 2, 2019 SUMMARY The Petitions to Deny and comments filed in this proceeding1 should be dismissed, denied, or rejected, clearing the way for prompt approval of the applications (the “Applications”) for Commission consent to the transfer of control of the licenses of television stations currently owned and operated by Tribune Media Company (“Tribune”) to Nexstar Media Group, Inc. (“Nexstar”) without conditions. As an initial matter, the Petitions are procedurally defective because the Petitioners have failed to establish standing as parties in interest, or to present “specific allegations of fact sufficient to show that . a grant of the application[s] would be prima facie inconsistent with” the public interest, convenience and necessity. Regardless, the Applications contain a fulsome and persuasive demonstration that the Transaction complies with all applicable rules—including as a result of divestitures that have now been announced or are being actively negotiated2—and that its approval will serve the public interest by permitting the delivery of enhanced local service and improving competition. In the face of Nexstar’s extensive demonstration of rule compliance and public interest benefits, the Opposing Parties are left to seek evaluation of the Applications under rules that do not exist, alternatively asking the FCC to apply versions of Commission rules that are not in effect or suggesting that the agency “condition” its approval of the Applications on requirements of the Opposing Parties’ own making. But the FCC has a settled policy of refusing to address industry- 1 The parties filing Petitions to Deny and comments are collectively referred to herein as the “Opposing Parties.” 2 It is anticipated that the final divestiture application will be submitted to the Commission within approximately the next week. wide issues in an adjudicatory licensing proceeding such as this one, and it should therefore reject the Opposing Parties’ attempts to end-run the rulemaking process. The retransmission consent-related arguments presented by certain Opposing Parties suffer from this same defect and many more, representing gratuitous attempts to convince the Commission to single out Nexstar for unnecessary and restrictive regulations that these parties have requested and failed to obtain many times before. Even were these arguments properly considered here (which they are not), they are based on speculative assumptions and exaggerations that lack any basis in fact. There is also no basis for the Commission to require the dismantling of Tribune’s existing combination of two Top-Four stations in Indianapolis. The Applications establish that the application of the Top-Four Prohibition to this combination would not serve the public interest, and the Opposing Parties that discuss this showing fail to substantively address the Applicants’ demonstration. Instead, they overlook the fact that competition-based concerns are irrelevant where a buyer is merely stepping into the shoes of a seller, and present retransmission consent- related claims that are not specific to the Indianapolis market. In sum, the Applications demonstrate compliance with the Commission’s rules and significant Transaction-specific public interest benefits, and the Opposing Parties’ arguments are improper in this adjudicatory proceeding, based on surmise and speculation or outright falsehoods, or otherwise insufficient to overcome the substantial showing contained in the Applications. For these and the many other reasons discussed herein, the Petitions should be promptly dismissed or denied, the commenters’ arguments rejected, and the Applications promptly granted without unnecessary and inappropriate conditions. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY......................................................................................................................................i I. INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................1 II. THE PETITIONS ARE PROCEDURALLY DEFECTIVE. .........................................2 A. The Petitioners Lack Standing. ................................................................................2 B. The Petitions Fail To Satisfy The Applicable Standard Of Review. .......................5 III. THE TRANSACTION COMPLIES WITH ALL APPLICABLE RULES..................6 IV. THE TRANSACTION WILL SERVE THE PUBLIC INTEREST. ............................9 V. THE OPPOSING PARTIES IMPROPERLY SEEK TO HAVE THIS TRANSACTION EVALUATED UNDER RULES THAT DO NOT EXIST. ...........15 A. Industry-Wide Issues Are Appropriately Addressed Through Rulemaking, Not Transaction Reviews. .............................................................................................15 B. Opposing Parties’ Contentions Regarding The National Television Ownership Rule Are Inappropriate In This Adjudicatory Proceeding. ....................................17 C. Calls for Conditions On Approval Of The Transaction Amount To Attempted End-Runs Around The Rulemaking Process. ........................................................18 VI. THE RETRANSMISSION CONSENT-RELATED ARGUMENTS ARE INAPPROPRIATELY ADVANCED HERE, AND ARE OTHERWISE TIRED AND SPECULATIVE. ....................................................................................................21 A. The Petitions and Comments Merely Repeat Arguments From Pending Rulemaking Proceedings Which Are Not Proper For Consideration In An Individual Transaction Review. .............................................................................21 B. The Opposing Parties’ Concerns About Retransmission Fees And Impasses Are Speculative And Exaggerated. ...............................................................................24 1. The Opposing Parties Present a Distorted and One-Sided View of the Retransmission Consent Marketplace. .......................................................26 2. The Opposing Parties Exaggerate The Risk Of Additional Carriage Disruptions As A Result of the Transaction. .............................................29 3. The Transaction Does Not Create Any New Sharing Arrangements and Will Not Affect Retransmission Consent Negotiations for Existing Sharing Stations. ......................................................................................................32 VII. THE COMMISSION SHOULD PERMIT NEXSTAR TO ACQUIRE TRIBUNE’S EXISTING TOP-FOUR COMBINATION IN INDIANAPOLIS. ..............................33 VIII. CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................37 I. INTRODUCTION Nexstar Media Group, Inc. (“Nexstar”) and Tribune Media Company (“Tribune”) (collectively the “Applicants”) hereby oppose the Petitions to Deny filed in the above-referenced proceeding by: (1) Common Cause, Public Knowledge, United Church of Christ, OC, Inc., and Sports Fans Coalition (“Special Interest Groups” or “SIGs”);3 (2) Frontier Communications Corporation (“Frontier”);4 and (3) DISH Network Corporation (“DISH”).5 The Applicants also hereby respond to the comments filed in this proceeding by (1) NCTA—The Internet & Television Association (“NCTA”);6 and (2) the American Television Alliance (“ATVA”).7 The Petitions and comments were filed in connection with applications seeking FCC consent to the transfer of control of the licenses of television stations currently owned and operated by Tribune to Nexstar 3 Petition to Deny of Common Cause, Public Knowledge, United Church of Christ, OC, Inc., and Sports Fans Coalition, MB Docket No. 19-30 (Mar. 18, 2019) (“SIG Petition”). 4 Petition to Deny of Frontier Communications Corporation, MB Docket No. 19-30 (Mar. 18, 2019) (“Frontier Petition”). 5 Petition to Deny of DISH Network Corporation, MB Docket No. 19-30 (Mar. 18, 2019) (“DISH Petition”). The SIGs, Frontier, and DISH will be collectively referred to herein as the “Petitioners.” 6 Comments of NCTA—The Internet & Television Association, MB Docket No. 19-30 (Mar. 18, 2019) (“NCTA Comments”). 7 Comments of American Television Alliance, MB Docket No. 19-30 (Mar. 18, 2019) (“ATVA Comments”). The Applicants also respond to selected arguments advanced in an ex parte notice filed by America’s Communications Association (formerly the American Cable Association) (“ACA”) after the deadline for petitions to deny. See ACA, Notice of Ex Parte, MB Docket No. 19-30; MB Docket No. 18-349; MB Docket No. 17-318; MB Docket No. 15-216; MB Docket No. 10-71 (Mar. 25, 2019) (“ACA Mar. 25 Ex Parte”). NCTA and ATVA will be collectively referred to herein as the “Commenters.” In addition, (1) the Petitioners and Commenters will be collectively referred to herein as the “Opposing Parties,” and (2) Frontier, DISH, NCTA, ATVA, and ACA will be collectively referred to herein as the “MVPD Parties.” (the “Applications”), as necessary to permit a merger of
Load more

Recommended publications
  • About Hearst-Argyle Television, Inc
    About Hearst-Argyle Television, Inc. • Established 1997, through the combination of the Hearst Broadcasting group and Argyle Television, Inc. • Publicly Traded on New York Stock Exchange (Symbol “HTV”) • 2006 Financial Statistics: o Revenue: $ 785.4 million o EBITDA (1): $ 287.9 million o Operating Income: $ 228.8 million o Net Income: $ 98.7 million o Shares Outstanding: 93 million o Dividends per Common Share: $ 0.28 • Total Assets: $3,958.1 million • Long-Term Debt: $ 777.1 million • Primary Revenue Source: Broadcast Advertising o Major categories of advertisers: Automotive, Retail, Furniture/Housewares, Financial Services, Corporate Packaged Goods, Fast Foods, Movies, Beverages, Pharmaceuticals, Political campaigns o Other revenue sources: Digital media advertising; retransmission- consent payments from program distributors • Ownership: Majority-owned by Hearst Corporation (www.hearst.com), the diversified media company whose other interests include newspapers, magazines and cable programming networks; the balance is held mostly by public shareholders • Employees: Approximately 3,000 full-time (1) EBITDA is a non-GAAP measure. For a reconciliation of this and other non-GAAP measures to GAAP financials in accordance with Regulation G, please see the “GAAP reconciliation” section of the Hearst-Argyle Television Web site, www.hearstargyle.com. • Presence in: 23 States • Properties: o 29 Television Stations, 2 Radio Stations 26 of the television stations are owned by Hearst-Argyle Television, Inc. Two of the TV stations and both radio stations are managed by Hearst-Argyle on behalf of Hearst Corporation under a management agreement; one TV station is managed on behalf of Hearst Corporation which is holder of a local marketing agreement (“LMA”) for the station.
    [Show full text]
  • What Is Control?
    WHAT IS CONTROL? Australians, or as many as possible, should have access to a choice of three commercial television channels Introduction In the same way as viewers in five of the six mainland capital cities. The The views expressed in this paper policy also made the grant of a third are entirely my own. They do not commercial television licence In Perth necessarily represent the views of any inevitable. person or company for whom I act or The means by which equalisation have acted in matters arising under is to be achieved remain an area of the relevant legislation. controversy. The debate about the use This paper is primarily concerned of multi-channel services (MCS) or with the answer to the question "What aggregation and the possibility of the is Control?". That question must now staging of MCS followed by aggregation be asked and answered In the light of has excited the regional stations. It the proposed new legislation announced has also been followed with great by the then Minister for Communica­ Interest by the networks. The timing, tions, the Hon. Mr Michael Duffy MP on commercial viability and the relation­ 27 November, 1986. In the absence of ship between MCS and aggregation are any more detailed information, it is all matters dealt with in the Broad­ necessary to speculate about the new casting Amendment Bill, 1986 which was regime to a considerable extent. reported on by the Richardson There are clearly risks in such an Committee. exercise, but they are risks worth taking In the debate about the new rules relating to ownership and The New Rules control.
    [Show full text]
  • Network 10'S Baby Joy
    Media Release Network 10’s Baby Joy. One Born Every Minute. Due In 2019. We’re just bursting with baby joy as we welcome the life-changing factual series, One Born Every Minute to the 10 family. Produced by Endemol Shine Australia, this tender and emotional series will be set in a bustling maternity ward and will capture all of the fear, love and joy that comes with welcoming new life into the world. From the reception desk to the operating theatre, remotely-operated cameras will capture the unpredictable, emotional and sometimes precarious situations that happen every day in a maternity unit. On commissioning the series, Network 10 Chief Content Officer Beverley McGarvey, said: Network 10 “We have seen our audiences really embrace and enjoy an insight into the world of A CBS Company genuinely amazing Australians including paramedics and life-guards so having the opportunity to now get close to the incredible and dedicated teams who help us through childbirth is not only thrilling but is a real privilege and a series we believe will be very special.” Endemol Shine Australia CEO Carl Fennessy, said: “One Born Every Minute is one of the world’s most dramatic, emotional and breath taking factual series. We are incredibly proud to bring this BAFTA Award winning format to Australian audiences in 2019”. From no-nonsense nurses to first-time mums and anxious dads, the human drama of One Born Every Minute will have you holding your breath, reaching for the tissues….and maybe rethinking your family plan. Created by Dragonfly, part of Endemol Shine UK, this award -winning documentary series has now been adapted in 10 markets including France, Denmark, Czech Republic and Israel.
    [Show full text]
  • REDACTED VERSION Before the Federal Communications
    REDACTED VERSION Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 FCC 16D-1 In the Matter of ) ) Game Show Network, LLC, ) Complainant, ) MB Docket No. 12-122 ) v. ) File No. CSR-8529-P ) Cablevision Systems Corp. ) Defendant. ) Issued: November 22, 2016 Released: November 23, 2016 INITIAL DECISION OF CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE RICHARD L. SIPPEL Appearances Stephen A. Weiswasser, Esq., Paul W. Schmidt, Esq., Elizabeth H. Canter, Esq., Laura Flahive Wu, Esq., Stephen Kiehl, Esq., C. William Phillips, Esq., and Jonathan M. Sperling, Esq., on behalf of Game Show Network, LLC; Jay Cohen, Esq., Andrew G. Gordon, Esq., Gary R. Carney, Esq., George W. Kroup, Esq., Tara M. Corvo, Esq., and Robert G. Kidwell, Esq., on behalf of Cablevision Systems Corporation; and Pamela S. Kane, Esq., and William Knowles-Kellett, Esq., on behalf of the Enforcement Bureau. TABLE OF CONTENTS Heading Paragraph # I. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT ............................................................................................................ 1 II. FINDINGS OF FACT .......................................................................................................................... 10 A. Description of Parties and Background ......................................................................................... 10 1. Game Show Network .............................................................................................................. 10 2. Cablevision Systems Corporation ..........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Schools-By-Network-Printable.Pdf
    SCHOOLS BY NETWORK ASSIGNMENT Network 1 Network 2 Network 3 Network 4 Network 5 Network 6 Network 7 Network 8 Chief: Chief: Chief: Chief: Chief: Chief: Chief: Lela Majstorovic Eduardo Cesario Randel Josserand Chief: William Klee Shontae Higginbottom Brian Metcalfe Minerva Garcia Sanchez Elizabeth Alvarez Bateman Armstrong G* Belmont-Craigin Alcott ES Beidler Armour Cardenas Brighton Park Beard Boone Brunson Audubon Cameron Brown W Castellanos Burroughs Beaubien Brennemann Burbank Barry Cather Burr* Cooper Calmeca Belding Budlong Camras Bell Chopin Dett Corkery* Christopher Bridge* Chappell Clark ES Blaine Columbus* Drummond Finkl Columbia Explorers Canty Clinton Depriest Brentano Crown Galileo Gary Daley Cleveland Coonley Ellington Chase De Diego Graham ES Hammond Davis N Dever Courtenay Falconer Darwin Ericson Haines Jungman Everett Dirksen Decatur Hanson Park Franklin Faraday Healy Kanoon Greene Disney II ES Field Hay Funston Frazier Prospective Holden Little Village Hamline Edison Gale Leland Goethe Gregory Irving McCormick Hedges Edison Park Goudy Locke J Greeley Hefferan Jackson A Orozco Lara Farnsworth Hayt Lovett Inter-American Hughes C Jenner Ortiz de Dominguez Pasteur Garvy* Jamieson Lyon* Jahn Jensen Lozano Perez Sandoval Gray Jordan Nash LaSalle Kellman McClellan Pickard Sawyer Haugan Kilmer Sayre Lincoln Lawndale Ogden ES Pilsen Seward Henry McCutcheon Schubert Lorca Lowell Otis Ruiz Shields Hibbard McPherson Spencer Manierre Mason Pritzker Saucedo Thomas Hitch New Field Young ES Mayer Melody Pulaski Spry ES Evergreen Murphy
    [Show full text]
  • Network 10 Broadcast Advertising Delivery Guidelines
    26 April 2020 Network 10 broadcast advertising delivery guidelines Network 10 material deadlines Material deadlines are in place to ensure the 10 Traffic team have enough time for the important checks and processes involved in getting your commercials to air. Unforeseen circumstances and problems can arise at any time, so it is imperative that deadlines supplied to you by the Traffic team are adhered to. There are three deadlines for the week prior to your activity going to air. They are: Network 10 A ViacomCBS • Material instruction deadline: The date by which you must advise the Traffic Team Company what key numbers you wish to run. Any time, date, channel or program restrictions should be included in the instructions. • CAD deadline – the date by which you must have Free TV classify your commercials. Commercials cannot go to air without CAD approval. • Material delivery deadline – the date by which the material for your commercials must be ‘on hand’ or delivered. There are many quality control and technical checks that need to be done before broadcast. Once material is fully on hand with Adstream or Peach IMD, it still takes time to be ingested on 10’s servers. The Traffic team will be in touch with you the week prior to your deadlines. If you are unsure of the deadlines, unsure you can meet deadlines or require an extension for your week’s activity, please enquire through the Traffic team using this email address [email protected]. Deadlines can change at any time due to public holidays, service provider outages and system updates.
    [Show full text]
  • Southwest Florida Frog Monitoring Network 10 Years of Change in the Frog Community of the Estero Bay Watershed
    Southwest Florida Frog Monitoring Network 10 years of change in the frog community of the Estero Bay Watershed Win Everham and John Cassani Florida Gulf Coast University and Lee County Water Hyacinth Control District Frogs – canaries in the coal mine www.lostlaowai.com/.../02/seven-legged-frog1.png www.chemistryexplained.com/images/chfa_03_img http://images.smh.com.au/2009/07/23/646328/frog11%20copy-600x400.jpg Frog Watch – Southwest Florida Amphibian Monitoring Network • started in 2000 • John Cassani and Ellen Lindblad • over 100 volunteers • supported by Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program • Frog Watch http://frogwatch.net/ • North American Amphibian Monitoring Program http://www.pwrc.usgs.gov/naamp/ Protocol • sampling • route • environmental factors • calls -150 -100 100 150 200 250 300 350 -50 50 0 Pig Frog Leopard Frog Florida Gopher Frog Percent change change Percent in average call intensity Green Treefrog Routes CH Barking Treefrog Squirrel Treefrog Pinewoods Treefrog - 2000 and 2004 Little Grass Frog 1, L Chorus Frog (FL) -2, L- Cricket Frog (Florida) Southern Toad 4, L Oak Toad E. Spadefoot Toad -5, L- Narrow-mouthed Toad Bull Frog 6, L Giant Toad -7 Cuban Treefrog Greenhouse Frog All native species All exotic species Polar Ordination of 2000 and 2004 data 60 50 L-4 40 L-5 2000 data 30 2004 data L-2 20 10 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 Squirrel TF Relative Abuncance 8 routes Pinewoods TF Relative Abundance at 8 routes 2 1.8 1.8 1.6 1.6 1.4 1.4 1.2 1.2 1 1 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.2 0 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
    [Show full text]
  • Return of The
    Return of the Mac Lucas Till stars in the reboot of “MacGyver,” premiering September 23, on CBS. FALL 2016 FALL “Conviction” ABC Mon., Oct. 3, 10 p.m. PLUG IN TO Right after finishing her two-season run as “Marvel’s Agent Carter,” Hayley Atwell – again sporting a flawless THESE FALL PREMIERES American accent for a British actress – BY JAY BOBBIN returns to ABC as a smart but wayward lawyer and member of a former first family who avoids doing jail time by joining a district attorney (“CSI: NY” alum Eddie Cahill) in his crusade to overturn apparent wrongful convictions … and possibly set things straight with her relatives in the process. “American Housewife” ABC Tues., Oct. 11, 8:30 p.m. Following several seasons of lending reliable support to the stars of “Mike & Molly,” Katy Mixon gets the “Designated Survivor” ABC showcase role in this sitcom, which Wed., Sept. 21, 10 p.m. originally was titled “The Second Fattest If Kiefer Sutherland wanted an effective series follow-up to “24,” he’s found it, based Housewife in Westport” – indicating on the riveting early footage of this drama. The show takes its title from the term used that her character isn’t in step with the for the member of a presidential cabinet who stays behind during the State of the Connecticut town’s largely “perfect” Union Address, should anything happen to the others … and it does here, making female residents, but the sweetly candid Sutherland’s Secretary of Housing and Urban Development the new and immediate wife and mom is boldly content to have chief executive.
    [Show full text]
  • “10 All Access” Launches in Australia
    “10 All Access” Launches in Australia December 3, 2018 CBS and Network 10’s Subscription Video On-Demand Service Offers More Than 7,000 Commercial-Free Episodes, Exclusive Original Series and the Ability to Watch Hit CBS Series Before They Air in Australia Dec. 3, 2018 – CBS and Network 10’s direct-to-consumer subscription video on-demand service, 10 All Access, debuts today, with more than 7,000 episodes of binge-worthy, commercial-free entertainment from CBS and 10. For $9.99 AUD a month plus a month free for new subscribers, 10 All Access will offer exclusive original series, current and previous seasons of select CBS and 10 shows, classic TV series, as well as the ability to live stream CBSN, CBS News’ 24/7 streaming news service. Network 10’s chief executive officer Paul Anderson said: “ 10 All Access gives us a fantastic new avenue to engage audiences with premium entertainment any way they want it. It fits perfectly into the 10 family alongside our broadcast channels, 10, 10 Boss and 10 Peach, our catch-up service 10 Play, and our news and entertainment site 10 Daily. We’ll continue to evolve 10 All Access with more great content to binge on and more product features to enhance the viewing experience. We are just getting started.” 10 All Access will be available on iOS and Android mobile and tablet devices, Apple TV, Android TV, Chromecast, and online via 10allaccess.com.au. Subscribers will be able to watch on three screens simultaneously, and the service will be launching on additional platforms in the coming months.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bachelor | Starbucks at Home Competition
    The Bachelor | Starbucks at Home Competition Terms and Conditions 1. Information on how to enter forms part of the terms of entry. Entry into The Bachelor | Starbucks at Home Competition (“Competition”) is deemed acceptance of these terms and conditions. Eligibility to Enter 2. Entry is open to all residents of Australia aged 18 and above. However, employees and the immediate families of Network Ten Pty Limited, Nestlé Australia Ltd (the “Sponsor”) and their associated agencies and companies or any organisation or individual associated with the provision of the prize(s) are not eligible to enter. Entrants must be residing in Australia at the time of entry, or their entry may be deemed invalid. Competition Period 3. The competition commences on Wednesday, 11 August 2021 at 12:00 AEST and closes on Sunday, 29 August 2021 at 23:59 AEST (“Competition Period”). 4. The Competition will be advertised on, but not limited to, Network 10 and www.10play.com.au. How to Enter 5. To participate in the Competition entrants must enter via one (1) of the following methods: a. Take a photo of your “perfect coffee moment at home”, and then either: i. Log into their Instagram account and upload the photo with the hashtag #starbucksperfectmatch. Account must be set to public and posted in the feed, not as an Instagram Story; or ii. Go to the Starbucks at Home Entry page at www.10play.com.au/win and upload the photo. 6. It is free to enter, however, the cost of accessing the Instagram App or promotional website is dependent on the entrant’s individual service provider.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual - Report 1988-89
    AUSTRALIAN BROADCASTING TRIBUNAL Annual - Report 1988-89 JB ... AUSTRALIAN BROADCASTING TRIBUNAL ANNUAL REPORT 1988-89 Australian Broadcasting Tribunal Sydney 1989 © Commonwealth of Australia 1989 ISSN 0728-8883 Design by Immaculate Conceptions Desktop Publishing, North Sydney, NSW. Printed in Australia by Canberra Publishing & Printing Co., Fyshwick, A.C.T. CONTENTS 1. Membership of the Australian Broadcasting Tribunal 1 2. The Year in Review 5 3. Powers and Functions of the Tribunal 13 4. Licensing 17 - Bond Inquiry 19 - Bond Inquiry - Chronology 22 - Commercial Radio Licence Grants 26 - Supplementary Radio Grants 30 - Joined Supplementary/Independent Grants 31 - Public Radio Grants 34 - Remote Licences 38 - Number and Type of Licences on Issue 39 - Converted Licences 40 - Consolidation of Licences 40 - Retransmission Permits 41 - Number of Licensing Inquiries 42 - Allocation of Call Signs 42 - Changes to the Memoranda of Licensees 44 - Permits for Test Transmissions 44 5. Ownership and Control 45 - Legislative Changes 47 - Applications Received 49 - Most Significant Inquiries 49 - Uncompleted Inquiries 59 - Licence Transfers 64 - Operation of Station by Other than Licensee 66 - Registered Lender Inquiries 67 6. Program and Advertising Standards 69 - Program and Advertising Standards 71 - Australian Content 72 - Compliance with Children's Standards 76 - Comments and Complaints 77 - Broadcasting of Political Matter 79 - Religious Programs 79 - Programs Research 80 - Compliance and Information Branch 81 7. Programs - Public Inquiries 83 - Public Inquiries 85 - Major Program Standards Inquiries 86 lll 7. Programs (cont.) - Other Program Standards Inquiries 91 - Children's and Preschool Children's Television Programs 102 8. Economics and Finance 105 - Financial Databases 107 - Financial Analyses 108 - Stations, Markets and Operations Databases 108 - Fees For Licences for Commercial Radio & Television Stations 109 - Financial Results o.f Commercial Television and, Commercial and Public Radio Station 111 9.
    [Show full text]
  • The Abc Television Network and Gray Television, Inc. To
    November 6, 2013 THE ABC TELEVISION NETWORK AND GRAY TELEVISION, INC. TO LAUNCH LOCAL ABC STATION IN THE LAREDO, TEXAS DMA KGNS 8.2 to Become 244th Affiliate for the Network The ABC Television Network and Gray Television, Inc. have reached a new affiliation agreement to broadcast the full ABC Television Network programming schedule in the Laredo, Texas DMA, using KGNS digital channel 8.2. The announcement was made today by John Rouse, senior vice president, Affiliate Relations, ABC Television Network and Hilton Howell, president and CEO of Gray Television, Inc. As part of the new affiliation, KGNS 8.2 will broadcast all of ABC’s primetime schedule, as well as “Good Morning America,” ABC Daytime programming, “World News” and “Jimmy Kimmel Live.” The channel is targeted to launch in February, 2014. “Laredo's number one local station, KGNS, is the logical choice to bring ABC's news, entertainment and sports programming to the local community,” said Kevin Latek, Gray’s Senior Vice President for Business Affairs. “And Gray is the logical choice to build the newest ABC affiliate as Gray has launched four new CBS affiliates and one new NBC since September 2012." “Gray Television is a great local broadcaster, and we’re looking forward to working with them to provide the very best news and entertainment programming to viewers in the Laredo area,” said Rouse. Gray Television’s other owned and/or operated ABC affiliates include WTOK, Meridian, Mississippi; KAKE, Wichita, Kansas; WVAW, Charlottesville, Virginia; WHSV, Harrisonburg, Virginia; WBKO, Bowling Green, Kentucky; KOLO, Reno, Nevada; and KJCT, Grand Junction, Colorado.
    [Show full text]